In 2010, a student at Harvard Law School filed a complaint with the US Department of Education, Boston Office for Civil Rights (OCR). She alleged that the Law School’s policies and procedures failed to comply with Title IX by failing to provide a prompt and equitable resolution of her complaint ...
read more >

In 2010, a student at Harvard Law School filed a complaint with the US Department of Education, Boston Office for Civil Rights (OCR). She alleged that the Law School’s policies and procedures failed to comply with Title IX by failing to provide a prompt and equitable resolution of her complaint that a fellow Harvard Law student sexually assaulted her. The complainant took issue with three school policies: 1) requiring victims to choose between filing criminal charges and filing a Title IX complaint with the Law School; 2) allowing for re-hearings that further delayed the process; and 3) using a clear and convincing evidence standard of proof in grievance procedures. On December 21, 2010, OCR announced that it would investigate the allegations.

In December 2014, after three years of investigating, OCR issued a letter of findings. In it, OCR wrote that it identified a number of compliance concerns with Harvard Law School’s policies and procedures. OCR determined that although the Law School complied with regulations regarding a notice of non-discrimination and provision of notice and contact information for the University’s Title IX Coordinator, it failed to comply with the requirement that the school respond promptly and equitably to complaints of sexual harassment and assault. In addition, OCR found that the Law School did not adequately train individuals involved in implementing its sexual harassment policies and procedures. However, with respect to the complainant’s specific allegations, OCR determined that: 1) Harvard Law did not have a policy or practice of requiring complainants to choose between filing institutional and criminal claims; 2) in no instances did re-hearing cause undue delay; and 3) the Law School used a clear and convincing standard in violation of Title IX.

To remedy the violations, Harvard Law entered into a resolution agreement with OCR. As a part of the agreement, the Law School agreed to:

Revise its Law School “Sexual Harassment Resources and Procedures for Students” and submit it to OCR for approval;

Take any specific steps necessary to ensure coordination between the Law School and the University, including the Harvard University Police Department;

Publish an updated notice of non-discrimination, which would include a statement that inquiries concerning Title IX may be referred to the designated Title IX Coordinators or to OCR and would also provide contact information for those officials;

Provide regular in-person or online training to staff responsible for recognizing and reporting incidents of sex discrimination and staff who are involved in implementing Title IX policies;

Offer annual information sessions informing students about the Law School’s prohibition on sex discrimination and its Title IX policies;

Conduct an annual climate check to assess the effectiveness of the steps taken pursuant to its agreement; and

Review all sexual misconduct complaints for the previous two years to ensure that they were handled in a manner consistent with Title IX.

The parties agreed that OCR would supervise compliance with the agreement through October 1, 2015. Because there has been no further reported activity, the case is presumed closed.